Why can't someone just sue Diebold for fraud and let the chips fall?

[garybeck]

Trying to sue the voting officials and Blackwell is OK, but suing Deibold and ESS as companies would be more promising. Both companies have lost lawsuits before. At least then power of subpeona would be granted to investigators,and the voting machines could be inspected.

[The Doctor.]

1. Burden of Proof.

The fight would come down to getting hold of their 'proprietary software', that's what would take a long time to fight for.

Definitely sue Blackwell.

Anyone doing that?

[emlev]

2. SUE Blackwell? ARREST him!

I'd settle for a mass citizen's arrest at this point.

In addition to the proprietary evidence question, there's also the question of who has standing to sue Diebold, ES&S, Triad, etc. I'd love to see jurisdictions going after those companies to get their money back for totally faulty equipment. That could put 'em out of business faster than divestiture!

[garybeck]

3. I would think that class action lawsuits could be filed

against Diebold and ESS and/or Triad for fraud. I've heard very knowledgeable lawyers say that there is already enough evidence.

I would think voters have a fraud case against the companies.

I would think that voting officials have a case, but can anyone find a voting official (short of Kevin Shelley) who is willing to file a case?

[trudyco]

4. What about the DU lawyer in Washington State - he was filing

a lawsuit that he thought could be used as a template elsewhere. I lost track of him.

Anybody know if he got anywhere?

[Melissa G]

6. pm Landshark

[Melissa G]

7. he is the lawyer...n/t

[emlev]

9. It's happening...stay tuned n/t

[helderheid]

5. didn't you hear?

They're banning class action lawsuits.

[Amaryllis]

13. It's not ALL class action suits, is it? I knew they were limiting them,

but I didn't think it was all of them.

[Amaryllis]

12. Lawyers, what about it? Could we do a class action suit? This issue has

been raised before on DU but I don't think ever addressed.

[Melissa G]

8. Diebold should be sued again for anti trust( LOL!!!) issues

I think it happened once before but conveniently someone made it okay?

[berniew1]

10. Why Diebold? they aren't biggest touch screen company & others had the mo

most documented touch screen fraud

Worst: ES&S
next: Sequoia

and the Unilect used in Mercer County, Pa and N. Carolina
had very bad record.


But the touch screens not only did a lot of switching; they also lost huge numbers of votes as undervotes-
75% undervotes in Mercer Co. precinct and very high some other places.


Touch screen fraud in 16 states documented:
http:/www.flcv.com/ussumall.html

and also huge numbers of "glitches" in most counties of most states that used them.


Any one figured out if most of the glitches were machine errors, programming errors, or fraud that was caught and called a glitch?
what do you think the percentages are?

[Amaryllis]

11. Land Shark is suing Sequoia.

[garybeck]

14. yeah, I can't wait for this!

I'm so glad for what Paul is doing. I can't wait!

But as he says, it is a local case he's working on. And I could be wrong but I think his case focuses on the legality of secret vote counting, not necessarily intentional fraud.

I just wonder, why can't the companies be sued in federal court for fraud, in conspiring to alter the election results?

The Moss V Bush case, from my non-legal view, was a vailant effort but doomed for failure because it would be nearly impossible to implicate Bush and Rove at this point.

It would be better to sue the companies (yes, I don't mean just diebold). This is much more provable. I know Diebold and Sequoia have both been sued before and lost. And, if any evidence comes out in the investigation that implicates others, like Bush and Rove, then great. Sort of like the way Whitewater led to Lewinskygate.

Bottom line is, somehow we need to crack open a lawsuit that will enable subpeonas so all these voting machines can be looked at. The smoking gun could be sitting on those machines right now.

[KaliTracy]

15. white water led to lewinsky? I thought Lewinsky showed up afterReblicans

SHUT DOWN the House and the Senate? Do I have my timelines wrong?

[Amaryllis]

16. Do they have hard evidence of fraud? I didn't think they did yet. But

if we can win cases saying secret vote counting is illegal, that should get things moving.